← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · JOEBIALEK
Thread ID: 8054 | Posts: 18 | Started: 2003-07-11
2003-07-11 17:49 | User Profile
The recent Supreme Court ruling striking down a Texas anti-sodomy law brings into question what factors were considered when the law was originally passed. A homosexual person is one who is sexually attracted to others of the same sex. Except for a genetic variation of nature, they are virtually identical to their heterosexual counter parts. They feel the very same kind of attraction to the same sex as heterosexuals feel about the opposite sex. Now, granted, there are those people who freely choose this behavior as a form of "life style" but that accounts for a very small population of homosexuals. In fact, if one is not genetically predispositioned for this behavior then by definition they are not truly homosexual but rather some deviant variation of perverted behavior. Some would argue that the Bible condemns homosexuality but I believe (through the persistence of science) this behavior will be proven to result from natural genetic variation. One can draw on the example of retarded people who by no action of their own are born comparatively slow or deficient in mental, physical, or emotional growth. Homosexual people are therefore entitled to engage in sexual behavior consistent with their genetic makeup so long as it is between consenting adults. To deny them this right would be the same as denying heterosexuals their right to consensual sex. Some would argue that sexuality is strictly for the purpose of reproduction but yet the animal kingdom has many variations of species who also cannot reproduce. Human beings are sexual beings as was intended by their creator and to suggest that a genetic variation of nature somehow makes homosexuals less human is indeed an inhuman concept.
2003-07-11 18:02 | User Profile
You are absolutely correct.
Since "retarded" folks, just like homosexuals, have been proven by an astounding preponderance of objective data to be created by nature, they should have every right accorded to "normals". Therefore, I will seek out homosexual Scoutmasters for my kids, allow Doyle the 57 IQ janitor to perform my brain surgery if necessary, urge my church to appoint homosexual clergy, and happily place my kids on the school bus driven by Derwin (on the days his seizures and hallucinations allow him to operate the bus by joystick while strapped in his chair).
It's a big ol' equalitarian world you've envisioned, Mr. Bialek, and I urge you to enter it. Lock the door behind you, please.
2003-07-11 18:13 | User Profile
I agree that gays probably do not "choose" their orientation. Then again, I don't think people who get off on smelling other peoples' feet really "choose" their perversion, either. That doesn't oblige me to call either, er, variation normal.
2003-07-12 00:38 | User Profile
I feel the same, Lewis.
I do not think most homosexuality is caused by genetic reasons, though I don't reject the idea that someday science will prove that some homosexuals are genetic. I view homosexuality as a sexual fetish. People with sexual fetishes don't choose their fetish. They usually have roots in deep childhood and family issues. However, they clearly aren't normal. Homosexuality, like shoe fetishists, bestiality, pedophiles, and furries are a sexual deviation.
2003-07-12 03:41 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Raina@Jul 11 2003, 20:28 * ** I seriously doubt you are German or Western European. The right - including far right - in Germany has more important things to worry about. You must be an Amerikan - probably a part-native mutt - with delusions of Teutonicity. **
Looks like the new person needs to read [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=boardrules]the posting guidelines.[/url]
Calm down, or did I offend you with the light-hearted 'nut' comment. No, it must have been something else - maybe this topic is close to your heart. :blink: :huh:
Teutonicity? Is that a word? On the by, I never claim my ancestors were teutons, the are allemannisch. :P
:sleep: :y
2003-07-12 05:33 | User Profile
*Originally posted by weisbrot@Jul 11 2003, 18:02 * **
It's a big ol' equalitarian world you've envisioned, Mr. Bialek, and I urge you to enter it. Lock the door behind you, please. **
I think a lot of what Bialek says is correct. I don't believe in the myth that homosexuality is strictly a "choice" (although there might be some truth to that when dealing with females since lesbianism isn't as taboo as male homosexuality and is considered "hip"). I agree with Bialek's assessment that those who see it as a "lifestyle" exhibit the mores that equal perversion. This is what passes off as homosexuality on TV, on shows like "Queer As Folk", "Will And Grace", and a new Bravo show called "The Queer Eye", I believe. As long as these approved caricatures of homosexuality continue, the attitudes of society, even those who represent the homosexual "community", and through its unofficial spokesmen, will continue to mud-sling each other to the grave.
2003-07-12 13:39 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Edana@Jul 11 2003, 18:38 * ** They usually have roots in deep childhood and family issues. However, they clearly aren't normal. Homosexuality, like shoe fetishists, bestiality, pedophiles, and furries are a sexual deviation. **
Exactly. Call it whatever you want. Point to whatever cause(s) you want. Talk about societies that accepted it. That still doesn't change the fact that homosexuals are "broken" in some way. Something went wrong somewhere to make them that way.
2003-07-12 17:04 | User Profile
Raina, I agree that the introduction of homophobia has a lot to do with Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions. Interestingly, there is a lot of evidence that same-sex unions were not uncommon, and even were blessed by the chruch until the late middle ages.
The Third Reich is riddled with sexual deviancy, for all its admirers here. It just is not much talked about.
It seems that the suppression and denial of orientation leads to evil and degeneracy, though its expression leads to abuse by the right.
ÃÅbeltäter is right of course, biologically the sex organs are there to serve one purpose: create offspring. Some bioligists consider all evolution and the rich variety of life on our planet nothing more than various paths taken in order for genes to propogate and ensure continuation of their lines. Too utilitarian for me. That said, I think there is a wide variety of sexual experience available to everyone. And lots of people have harmless fetishes.
From some of the postings on this and related topics, some of our posters must have the most dreary sex lives on the planet after amoebas: Nightclothes, bags over their heads, and of course, only in the Missionary position. Part of that hangover that sex is bad, dirty, and to be denied as existing at all, at least in the presence of polite company.
But Raina, for the record, this whole myth of racial purity is bunkum. Even during the migrations westwards of present day Europeans, all the tribes had some degree of co-mingling. And Germany, with the many medieval wars especially the 30 years war, certainly had a large degree of genetic mixing.
I always find it amusing that the Bavarians, and the Austrians, who seem to have been the most ardent Nazis, are also the regions that had the highest degree of racial mixing. Maybe that is why, (as you were not too subtly taunting ÃÅbeltäter,) they all tried so hard to be the best Nazis they could be.
Another thing, most of the Nazi elite should have volunteered themselves for extermination in a camp somewhere, or at least offered their testes for voluntary sterilisation, as the bulk of them certainly did not bespeak the ridiculous racial ideals they were propogating. Such actions would have at least shown they were truly men who followed their own convictions, instead of cowardly enforcing them on others.
Probably the reason that club-footed, badly toothed liar Goebbels got to run the Ministry of Propaganda :lol:
2003-07-13 13:23 | User Profile
Sorry, I didn't mean to post this twice.
2003-07-13 13:26 | User Profile
"Bestiality a deviation? Deviating from what? If a het couple enjoy oral sex, are they "deviants" for that? Bottom line, some people are just going to do what feels good. I don't see how bestiality is deviant. & it's not necessarily abusive to the animals either. Things like dog fighting, c*ck fighting etc on the other hand..."
I think only a deviant would have to ask such a question.
"What do you mean by pedophiles? If it's people who feel attraction for prepubescents, people in general would qualify. Many women are aroused while breastfeeding their children or giving birth. Women & men may have sexual thoughts when seeing an aesthetically pleasing child walk by. This is normal & don't kid yourself otherwise. Ever read any Sappho? If you're into traditional values and High Culture, you should. She was girl lover & I'm sure a "pedophile" and "deviant" by your terminology. & she was a great teacher who uplifted everyone she made contact with (pun intended)."
Pedophiles should be burnt at the stake. You are a very warped person! :thd:
2003-07-13 14:28 | User Profile
Rain, an inability to feel attraction to an adult (post pubescent) of the opposite sex is a deviation and a case of major faulty wiring. Dogs may hump legs, and humans may do the equivelent of leg-humping (masturbatory excercises for just "feeling good"), but those leg-humping dogs and masturbating humans still want to mate with the opposite sex - for the entire purpose of that sexual drive is the urge for the species to mate and breed, not to hump legs. When a man's sole focus is on shoes or other men, while being uninterested in mating with a woman, he has faulty wiring due to chemical reasons or childhood trauma.
2003-07-13 14:34 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Raina@Jul 13 2003, 07:33 * ** So Solomon should have been burnt at the stake? He was known to sleep with young virgins. Yet your Bible calls him the most righteous man before Jesus. **
Since when are all "young virgins" children? A child is someone who has not gone through puberty. Considering post-pubescent 15 year olds "children" is a modern mode of thinking due to public school-induced extended childhood.
A pedophile is one who's sexual focus is boys or girls who have not gone through puberty. Five year olds, eight year olds...
And yes, these people should be dealt with very harshly.
2003-07-13 15:01 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Raina@Jul 13 2003, 08:39 * ** Yes & no. It's true that no one is born 100% "gay". As I remarked earlier: "Humans are not "homo" or "hetero" but just sexual. No one is born exclusively "homosexual" or "heterosexual" - the concept didn't even exist until very recently. People are born sexual, & how they express it depends on their culture & upbringing."
But you're wrong that the whole purpose of sex drive is to reproduce. Sure, that can be part of it - but pleasure & emotional fulfillment also factor in. Among other things. There's a sex drive in children long before they're even capable of reproducing. It still serves its purposes, even then.
In ancient Greece, male-male eroticism served the purpose of making soldiers adore one another as much as they loved their women back home. This made combat units very cohesive. A very concrete purpose - and one that had nothing to do with reproduction. Female teachers like Sappho experienced erotic bonds with their female students - another example.
The point? Sex is what we make it. There is no God telling us what to do or how to do it. **
Raina, I feel silly needing to explain such basic things to you. You seem like a very confused individual, though that's to be expected in the modern "education" climate. In all species, the purpose of the sexual drive is to mate and reproduce. That's where it came from and why it's there. This is why the vast majority of humans instinctually become attracted to the opposite sex. "Culture" didn't cause nature, but was built around nature. Tiger "culture" doesn't cause tigers to mate with tigers of the other gender and have babies.
However, sexual behavior definately needs to "feel good" for the species to want to do it. As a result, humans and animals can "feel good" by leg-humping and other masturbatory activities, usually as a resort when they don't have a willing female (or male, for females) around (see: Prison). However, for all your claims about sexuality being for "emotional fulfillment", does anyone really get fulfillment from masturbating or humping an apple pie? No, humans usually seek emotional/sexual fulfillment through relations with the opposite sex.
By the way, I'm an agnostic, so you can leave religion and God out of any of your replies to me.
2003-07-13 15:30 | User Profile
Explaining basic biology. Nature and biology came first, culture second. Culture was built around the first.
You haven't written anything that I haven't read from dozens of other rightwingers.
Then you should have no problems making counter-arguments instead of tossing out the "rightwinger" (a rather broad label, doncha think?) line.
Can you tolerate disagreement?
I was under the impression that I'm doing more than tolerating disagreement. I'm openly conversing with you instead of just yelling at you to go away. Can't you do anything this time besides pull out the:
"Oh, poor me, you're just persecuting 'rebellious' taboo-breaking me because you're a bigoted right-winger!"
I must say, you haven't written anything that I haven't read from dozens of other self-proclaimed taboo-breakers with a martyr complex. What a cliche pattern. "Taboo-breaker" makes a claim (a claim which usually happens to not differ much from popular claims by those "rebels" at the universities - such taboo breaking!). Claim is disputed and refuted by others. Taboo-breaker cries about intolerance. :y
2003-07-13 15:56 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Edana@Jul 13 2003, 14:28 * ** When a man's sole focus is on shoes or other men, while being uninterested in mating with a woman, he has faulty wiring due to chemical reasons or childhood trauma. **
I do believe that a person's sexuality is most likely based on chemical balances, but that doesn't make him fit for "faulty wiring". As for childhood trauma, elaborate on this. It's common for someone to acknowledge himself as homosexual in adult life who didn't have a bond with his father, or someone of the same sex as a child. That is the greatest loss one can have. I should know; that was my experience with my own father.
2003-07-13 16:04 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Raina@Jul 13 2003, 09:20 * **
"Shoe fetish" is just an example of sexualizing an object; men & women do this all the time.
Society tries to stamp this out, but to no avail. You can push it in the closet, but you can't get rid of it & you can't always make it stay there. **
Exactly. I would stretch it a little further by saying that the foot is an important and powerful part of the human body. The shoe accentuates that, and ultimately, enhances it.
I don't see foot fetishism as abnormal but rather a natural affection for a conspicuous part of the body.
2003-07-13 16:11 | User Profile
Originally posted by Robbie+Jul 13 2003, 09:56 -->
QUOTE* (Robbie @ Jul 13 2003, 09:56 ) <!--QuoteBegin-Edana@Jul 13 2003, 14:28 * ** When a man's sole focus is on shoes or other men, while being uninterested in mating with a woman, he has faulty wiring due to chemical reasons or childhood trauma. ** I do believe that a person's sexuality is most likely based on chemical balances, but that doesn't make him fit for "faulty wiring". As for childhood trauma, elaborate on this. It's common for someone to acknowledge himself as homosexual in adult life who didn't have a bond with his father, or someone of the same sex as a child. That is the greatest loss one can have. I should know; that was my experience with my own father.**
Yes, things like lack of bond or a dysfunctional bond with a parent. I've known many homosexuals, and most of them had a dysfunctional background and had a myriad of other types of imbalanced behavior to go along with their homosexuality, such as extremely high rates of substance abuse and pill-popping for depression or manic-depression (before anyone claims this was because everyone around was "homophobic", the area they lived in was very "gay friendly" and they were usually accepted and loved by major family members, such as the mother or sister).
For a couple of examples off the top of my head, one homosexual I knew was raped and repeatedly sexually used by an older cousin when he was a child. Another was sent to live for a period of time with his sadistically abusive grandmother because his parents were drug addicts. As I said, most had drug/alcohol problems and other mental problems.
Edana
2003-07-13 16:17 | User Profile
Originally posted by Robbie+Jul 13 2003, 10:04 -->
QUOTE* (Robbie @ Jul 13 2003, 10:04 ) <!--QuoteBegin-Raina@Jul 13 2003, 09:20 * ** "Shoe fetish" is just an example of sexualizing an object; men & women do this all the time.
Society tries to stamp this out, but to no avail. You can push it in the closet, but you can't get rid of it & you can't always make it stay there. **
Exactly. I would stretch it a little further by saying that the foot is an important and powerful part of the human body. The shoe accentuates that, and ultimately, enhances it.
I don't see foot fetishism as abnormal but rather a natural affection for a conspicuous part of the body. **
To clarify, I don't consider a small attraction to feet (or legs, breasts, buttocks, hair, etc) along with a main overall attraction to the opposite sex to be a "fetish". A fetishist would be someone who is only interested in feet or shoes (usually to the point of obsession), with very little or no interest in the woman. That is a deviation of the sex drive.
On the topic of homosexuality, a lesbian is not a woman who might get a little turned on by watching another naked woman in a porno movie. A lesbian is a woman who is solely interested in sexual pursuits with other women while having no interest in men. That is a deviation of the sex drive as well.